Jump to content
=LG=Kathon

Tactical Air War

Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, LeLv76_Erkki said:

Please no Spitfire IX on the Eastern front or in general forcing players to buy a $70 pre-order DLC just for 1 or 2 planes they can fly for a week per campaign.

 

Spitfire F/HF Mk. IXe vs. 109 G-14 is no problemo, MW50 is that awesome, but if one doesnt happen to have Bodenplatte he/she will be stuck with a G-4 or G-2. As the campaign revolves around CAS and tactical bombing, the Pe-2 and lethal red light AAA(fragile Stuka and 110) are already a great equalizers despite V-VS fighters tending to be worse than Luftwaffe's.

 

I agree paywall requirements - if in fact this really is one - do suck.  However, considering the "historical" plane sets being used for each map, and assuming that, next TAW cycle, there will again be 8 maps, to win Allies will be forced to win maps 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 as winning during maps 1, 2, and 3 will be highly improbable.  In that case, if Axis wins the first 5 maps, then campaign victory will be claimed and finishing the last maps would be just "something to do".  Remember, Allied victories this TAW were attributed to a: finding the weak spot in the rules. (immediate merciless depot killing at the start of the map) and b: claims that since the campaign was already won, the bulk of team Axis "lost interest".  So... by the time map 7 or 8 rolls around, I really don't see the bulk of team Axis caring if the Allies get a few extra equalizers.  Well, except for those who don't like their baby seals being a bit more club-resistant.  Then we'll find out that Allied planes run on salt. 

 

The G-14 might be a drag racer that has a high top speed and acceleration, but it really can't turn as well as earlier models.  The airframe that had superior performance for the E and F is too bloated with "moar powaa!" at the cost of weight and fast became unsuitable.  There's a reason why the 109 E had around 750 horsepower but ruled the sky over planes with substantially more horsepower and the 109 F wasn't much heavier or more powerful, but was renowned as an "If you see one, your best bet is to run or immediately bail out" fighter.  Consider if you will, a gazelle.  Its skeleton is exactly the right frame to be light, fast and agile. But, if you add rhino bulk to said frame, it becomes something that while able to perform burst feats of strength, really only provides extra hamburger per animal.  What's that you say?  G-14 burgers come pre-salted!  Excellent! :cool:

 

The Spitfire Mk. IX while not having the straight-line speed is still pretty close. Add to it that it CAN turn fight.   While the Germans were basically adding more - and simultaneously sacrificing more - to the 109, the British had an airframe that was still able to be improved and refined with each "con" being rather insignificant to the "pro" that was added.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Disarray said:

And how is that any different than putting Mig 3's up against F4's? God forbid the Germans get a taste of being over matched.

 

I know this results in huge flame most likely. But you can almost always select two planes which are more or less unbalanced. MiG-3 vs 109F-4 is one example. Ju-87 vs Il-2 is next one from the other perspective. He-111 vs Pe-2 is another hardly comparable couple (it always depends on the point of view which one is better). Et cetera, et cetera.

 

The biggest objection against BoP planes being included into the TAW now, is that not everyone has this addition. According to the information from this forum, there is significant portion of TAW players, not heaving the BoM/BoK neither. Thus I see no reason why to add BoP planes at such early stage of development. Anyway, speaking from purely historical point of view, Bf 109G-2/G-4 or even G-6 should not be so underperforming vs Spitfire Mk.IX with 18 lbs boost. The performance of G-2 and G-4 especially should be in fact better in terms of speed (at most altitudes) and climb than even the Spitfire LF Mk.IX with 18 lbs boost Merlin 66.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Mobile_BBQ said:

 

I agree paywall requirements - if in fact this really is one - do suck.  However, considering the "historical" plane sets being used for each map, and assuming that, next TAW cycle, there will again be 8 maps, to win Allies will be forced to win maps 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 as winning during maps 1, 2, and 3 will be highly improbable.  In that case, if Axis wins the first 5 maps, then campaign victory will be claimed and finishing the last maps would be just "something to do".  Remember, Allied victories this TAW were attributed to a: finding the weak spot in the rules. (immediate merciless depot killing at the start of the map) and b: claims that since the campaign was already won, the bulk of team Axis "lost interest".  So... by the time map 7 or 8 rolls around, I really don't see the bulk of team Axis caring if the Allies get a few extra equalizers.  Well, except for those who don't like their baby seals being a bit more club-resistant.  Then we'll find out that Allied planes run on salt. 

 

The G-14 might be a drag racer that has a high top speed and acceleration, but it really can't turn as well as earlier models.  The airframe that had superior performance for the E and F is too bloated with "moar powaa!" at the cost of weight and fast became unsuitable.  There's a reason why the 109 E had around 750 horsepower but ruled the sky over planes with substantially more horsepower and the 109 F wasn't much heavier or more powerful, but was renowned as an "If you see one, your best bet is to run or immediately bail out" fighter.  Consider if you will, a gazelle.  Its skeleton is exactly the right frame to be light, fast and agile. But, if you add rhino bulk to said frame, it becomes something that while able to perform burst feats of strength, really only provides extra hamburger per animal.  What's that you say?  G-14 burgers come pre-salted!  Excellent! :cool:

 

The Spitfire Mk. IX while not having the straight-line speed is still pretty close. Add to it that it CAN turn fight.   While the Germans were basically adding more - and simultaneously sacrificing more - to the 109, the British had an airframe that was still able to be improved and refined with each "con" being rather insignificant to the "pro" that was added.  

 

 

Hey,

 

G-14 most certainly can turn fight, and having a very powerful, 10 min (+ 10 + around 5) WEP instead of earlier 109's less powerful 1 minute boost is a major improvement. Early 109s and 190s cant outturn many of their opponents either, and they're still very competitive fighters. G-14 is basically a more boosted up G-6 and the G-6 itself isnt all that hopeless turner.

 

I feel most people fly TAW not for map wins but for the teamwork, the dynamic campaign itself and the thrill of multiplayer between more or less organized groups of human players.

 

About the baby seals... Yeah well, in the top 20 in K/D and wins/losses half are red, and blues just lost by running out of pilots. Maybe red fighters arent all that inferior after all, especially considering TAW isnt just fighters vs. fighters. ;) Unfortunately GK/d and tank kills/d are much more difficult to track and naturally sample size in pilots could be larger.

 

Re donations, thanks for reminding me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The more I think about it....

 

TAW is based on "winning the most matches wins the campaign".  That's all well and good, but it's also trying to be historical.  The point being that balancing for history - when the history is that the LW had V-VS on the back foot for most of the war - will have a higher likelihood of following history. The LW holds advantage for more that 50% of the time then the VV-S gets updated and can manufacture in larger numbers and pushes back hard.  Is it possible that for there to be a truly competitive setup for TAW from map 1, then history shouldn't be figured in? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I very specifically chose the Mig 3 and the F4, actually. This match up was considered acceptable when the plane sets were worked out. Never mind that the Mig is in no way a credible counter to the F4. There wasn't much uproar over that, except from the people who had to fly the Mig. This isn't some hypothetical or comparison of two planes that were designed to fill different tactical roles a'la the Stuka and IL 2. These are two planes that fill the same role and will necessarily counter one another. If it is good for the goose it must be good for the gander, as they say.

 

And if, as it is claimed, there are very few people who play on the server who even have access to these planes why would it be so terrible to add them in? Are there only a set number of plane types that can be on the server at any one time? No, you can have all the planes in the game available at the same time. Will they suddenly flood a map with these super elite planes that the Germans can't counter? No, there aren't enough players with access to them and the difference between the Allied fighters and the BOS and BOK German fighters isn't such that they could just roll over them. Really all that would happen is a little more variety would be injected into the game. The only reason I can see, from a game play perspective, not to add them is that you don't want to fight better equipped opponents.

 

The problem with balancing for history, Mobile, is there is a lot of history that is outside of the scope of the game. Manufacturing defects and maintenance short falls, numbers differences that if enforced would cause a group of players to go into a tissy, a lack of influential planes that shaped some of the battles like the Yak 9 and so on. Plus if history is balanced for it would likely mean deciding the outcome before the thing has started, and where is the fun in that. Also the Soviet air force wasn't 'on the back foot.' As soon as things bogged down in Stalingrad, about the mid point of the war in the East, the Soviets began gaining ground both in the air and on the ground. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, IKraft said:

How long does it usually take for a new campaign to start?

 

Since time is a relative concept, anywhere between now and the heat death of the universe is a good guess.

 

But usually it is a few weeks to a months. But it will feel like an eternity.... 

Edited by Cpt_Siddy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Especially since I just returned, and basically missed 3/4th of the Campaign. I was hoping for one to start now - in 4 weeks I'll be gone again... 🤔

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, =LG=Leutnant_Artur said:

Oh boy so many donators, thanks guys ! ;) I think we must figure out something special for you 🤔

 

Just a proposal:

 

start it in coming 1..2 weeks that we can donate it again!

  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm practicing up in a bunch of planes I haven't flown much. So far I've only gotten competent with the I-16, MiG-3 and *maybe* the Il-2 (I can take off, land, and kill things in those ones). My goal is to be sufficiently familiar with the planes to be able to fly them without being a burden on the team lol. 

So hopefully I can sign up for next TAW! 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/19/2018 at 4:04 AM, Carl_infar said:

If you are so bored you can go and fly WOL insted of complaining that you was to bored to concentrate on objectives and win ;)

 

 

Myself and a lot of TAW regulars did just that. Once we lost the campaign I stopped at map 5. Became a pointless slog.

I would be interested in seeing if there was a RED side public player surge or if TAW regulars really did just wait for the late war aircraft. If it was that the Red squadrons waited I will be disappointed. The early war is a lot of fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/19/2018 at 1:04 PM, Carl_infar said:

If you are so bored you can go and fly WOL insted of complaining that you was to bored to concentrate on objectives and win ;)

 

 

First of all, I don't understand this derogatory tone towards the WOL, when there is no TAW it is the most visited server, and the administrators provide us with fun of very good quality and throughout the year.
Secondly, personally I only have the BOS and the BOM and it's the maps of the beginning that I like the most, the last maps because I don't have the BOK, the possibilities are reduced for me drastically, so much so that in the last map, I only have one fighter available, one bomber and one attack plane. If including BOB planes means eliminating Moscow or Stalingrad planes, I think the last maps will be flown by a lot fewer people than before.
I know the developers want us to buy the new products, and I assure you it's not for lack of desire, but we can't always have what we would like.

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/22/2018 at 7:15 PM, 1./JG42flesch said:

Hi Kathon,

 

please look at the Stats an Ban the Pilot Schuck for shot down an Friendly Pilot.

THX Flesch

https://screenshots.firefox.com/6b9h8X6QRP5KVhal/taw-server.de

 

Ha ha ha, hilarious.....

 

Check out your own stats, you also managed to shoot down a friendly.

And have been killed 41 times, with the loss of 97 aircraft, who's side were you on?

People in glass houses......

 

Anyone who knows me, will now i'm not that kind of person, a genuine mistake.

 

 

NB, and the first time i've done it.

 

Edited by JG5_Schuck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know you both and can assure you flesch that Shuck is a good guy and he certainly did not do it on purpose. Like he said ... an honest mistake. Hope you can forgive and forget :)

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

W

12 hours ago, JG5_Schuck said:

 

Ha ha ha, hilarious.....

 

Anyone who knows me, will now i'm not that kind of person, a genuine mistake.

 

 

NB, and the first time i've done it.

 

 

When I read the whole post, the first thing I thought was "is it 110 or Pe-2?"   Lo and behold, I looked at the screenshot and it was the classic "110 or Pe2?" mistake.  

I did the same thing.  I was lucky enough to not get a friendly plane kill of off it, but I did waste BOTH rear gunners on that poor Peshka.  Also, having flown the Pe2 a lot during the last TAW I've had my fair share of incoming friendly fire.  

 

It all comes down to practicing target ID, and I'm sure it's a mistake most pilots only make once.  However, I'm sure there's a rather large club of pilots who have.  :blink:  

 

 

Nevermind - I misread the stats on the screenshot.  :blink::blink: 

Edited by Mobile_BBQ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This server goes off line for changes and updates after every campaign. The campaign just recently ended. Once the next one is ready they will post an announcement in this thread. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good day to All.
It's full of summer, and another campaign is behind us. On behalf of TAW campaign administrators, I would like to wish all a peaceful holiday time, and gathering strength for the needs of the next upcoming XV season.
I would also like to mention that compared to the previous edition, we now have four pilots instead of two who have won the Kuznechik and Enkas awards. This testifies very well to their style of flying and respecting their virtual lives. Let this trend increase with each subsequent campaign.
Good job!

 

 


37981342_2140395836271726_2061602018820037997773_2140395809605062_34803174328059

37940958_2140395859605057_5449353925620637930897_2140395922938384_23062312227176
 

 

BEST FIGHTERS

 

 


38026272_2140396506271659_16656847222247

 

37934693_2140396446271665_49747483399217

 

37964888_2140396489604994_39782844794992

 

37943255_2140396556271654_55159368365155

 

37943224_2140396602938316_18313074314817

 

BEST BOMBERS

 

 


37953470_2140396992938277_67332515402507

 

37907769_2140397012938275_45368583465771

 

37969193_2140397059604937_13243797129144

 

37976068_2140397126271597_18595232749673

 

37932238_2140397169604926_75142816664670
 

 

BEST TANK KILLERS

 

 


38005040_2140397546271555_73888365766728

 

37985245_2140397576271552_72204831916336

 

37993276_2140397622938214_15674847402928

 

37960185_2140397666271543_50190035884504

 

38059402_2140397699604873_60674159501964
 

 

 

BEST FIGHTER SQUADS



37951107_2140398232938153_53230462947242

 

37938978_2140398212938155_73870323468111

 

37928941_2140398166271493_71976616724529

 

37956025_2140398322938144_95639738182847

 

37932895_2140398342938142_32743725913216

BEST BOMBER SQUADS



37923971_2140398869604756_18120789144371

 

37947938_2140398829604760_67040843658040

 

37921577_2140398836271426_25145281686819

 

37938215_2140399002938076_18999170085945

 

37921860_2140398969604746_91296859753566

BEST TANK KILLER SQUADS



37969510_2140399579604685_50520572315587

 

37968331_2140399539604689_37456538809233

 

38007979_2140399629604680_68814255067811

 

37936608_2140399692938007_65330626464327

 

37940879_2140399719604671_24093454160353

 

Edited by =LG=Piciu
  • Thanks 6
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Firts Thank you LG for all you support and work to keep TAW online.

Gracias totales.

The are some issues with the last edition, not necessary to mention.

TAW is not an historical campaign, for the future the best way is do it thinking in balance.

These are a few comments for your consideration.

Increase the AAA on Depots, that is a important target in the heart of enemy territory won´t be easy to destroy specially if you attack alone. 

Release the VYA23 on Lagg3, dont be afraid, reds saw a lot of BFs with gunpods and we have to face it.

A train is an important target, increase the AAA on trains, remember the AAA on the old ADW?, something like that.

Thank you.

See you in the sky

 

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just wanna say thanks to the server admins for such a great and challenging server to play in..I'll be donating on my next payday :)

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, ECV56_Necathor said:

Release the VYA23 on Lagg3, dont be afraid, reds saw a lot of BFs with gunpods and we have to face it.

 

Yes, adding 109F4 with gunpods on 2nd map while removing VYa from Lagg-3 until 4th map...was a bit too much. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

VYa on a Lagg-3 enables a fighter to kill tanks on top of the bomb load it carries. While gunpods on any of the 109s just make it for a slow glass bomber killer. I'd compare vya23 to an mk108 mod on a 109-f4 considering how deadly and effective vya cannon is right now. Obviously 109f4 never had mk108.

 

Depot AAA consists of high flak and some medium calibre guns which are still quite easy to take out in a swarm as they have the range to focus on the rabbit while the rest strafe the guns. Adding a few dozen machinegun posts similar to a Coconut expert server around the medium calibre flak will help protect it as rabbit won't be able to drag 1km range guns all at the same time. It also appears depot AAA does not respawn immediately next mission so you just fighter sweep the flak and grind the buildings with JABO.

Edited by xJammer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The small magazine of the 23 mm gun on the LaGG, along with the sub-par performance of the plane itself, more than compensate for the increase in firepower. And a 109 with gunpods is nothing to discount. It is effectively tripling the firepower the plane has. Any performance loss incurred with the pods still places most 109's comfortably above the majority of their competition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Propose a:

 

1. Give the Ju-52 VVS RKKA as a landing and transport aircraft, camouflage can be used "AIR-ARCTIC", or make it recoverable on a common basis, by performing combat missions, now Luftwaffe has a serious handicap using the endless u-52 as a means of damage and capture of the airfield.

2. Cannon " VYA " to make available the title, say the captain, historically they were very few, we have exactly the opposite.

3. At damaged airfields or if the airfield destroyed fuel warehouses to limit not only the number of available aircraft and the choice of weapons, but also fuel, say 40-50% for fighters, 20-30% for attack aircraft and 10-15% for bombers....this can be configured for each individual type.

4. leave the BF-109E7 and I-16 are available up to 43 years, if you have the opportunity to share them with the start of the campaign on the fighter and assault versions

5. To leave available P-40 throughout the campaign.

6. Some offer to make available to the La-5 engine M-82Ф with the emergence of Fw-190А3, but personally I'm against.

7. to strengthen the air defense of the rear warehouses.

Edited by =FPS=Cutlass

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Disarray said:

The small magazine of the 23 mm gun on the LaGG, along with the sub-par performance of the plane itself, more than compensate for the increase in firepower. And a 109 with gunpods is nothing to discount. It is effectively tripling the firepower the plane has. Any performance loss incurred with the pods still places most 109's comfortably above the majority of their competition.

 

109 with gunpods is a non-compete against any competent pilot. Vya on a lag enables you to strafe tanks while also carrying a bomb load and still be capable as a dogfighter. Vya simply doesn't compare to gunpods on a 109 its that much more impactful. Also lagg is hardly a bad aircraft and you won't need Vya to kill most of the blues - just take the 20mm or take the 37mm if you plan to hunt for bombers.

 

IMO the entire "balance" argument is going to spiral down a huge rabbit hole very quickly at this point. Some amount of historical pretence for lineups should remain as a reference point as otherwise we might just as well enable all aircraft on all sides so we get a symmetrical game.

 

OTOH I am hoping with the new tank crew release the blues will finally get tigers in the tank columns. Dealing with 3-5 KV1s in a column is quite painful.

Edited by xJammer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, xJammer said:

 

IMO the entire "balance" argument is going to spiral down a huge rabbit hole very quickly at this point. Some amount of historical pretence for lineups should remain as a reference point as otherwise we might just as well enable all aircraft on all sides so we get a symmetrical game.

 

 

I agree.  If people want balance, then it (mostly) can't be historical, and vice versa.  The Axis started out WWII with an immense advantage in the baby-seal-clubbing department, only to have the tables turned by the Allies - who not only were able to produce some superior-performing aircraft, also had manufacturing capabilities the Axis couldn't attack.

 

The LaGG-3 while being a "not bad" aircraft, was historically not on-par with German fighters of the time.  Whether or not the 23mm is accurately modeled, I cannot say.  I do know a 1-2 second burst from a 109 F4's guns will pulverize a plane, and every time I've shot a 109 or 190 with the LaGG's guns it kept flying with negligible damage.  User experience may vary, I suppose... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, xJammer said:

109 with gunpods is a non-compete against any competent pilot.

 

Actually an F4 with gunpods on map 2 is still outperforming the opposition in many aspects.

 

The VYa-23mm is currently one of the most potent weapons in the game only matched by the Mk 108.

 

I still advocate for a historically accurate campaign!

Edited by Operatsiya_Ivy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mobile_BBQ said:

 

I agree.  If people want balance, then it (mostly) can't be historical, and vice versa.  The Axis started out WWII with an immense advantage in the baby-seal-clubbing department, only to have the tables turned by the Allies - who not only were able to produce some superior-performing aircraft, also had manufacturing capabilities the Axis couldn't attack.

 

The LaGG-3 while being a "not bad" aircraft, was historically not on-par with German fighters of the time.  Whether or not the 23mm is accurately modeled, I cannot say.  I do know a 1-2 second burst from a 109 F4's guns will pulverize a plane, and every time I've shot a 109 or 190 with the LaGG's guns it kept flying with negligible damage.  User experience may vary, I suppose... 

 

 

 

 

2 minutes ago, Operatsiya_Ivy said:

 

Actually an F4 with gunpods on map 2 is still outperforming the opposition in many aspects.

 

I still advocate for a historically accurate campaign!

 

Fair point, I am not advocating having F4 without a counterpart though, just that centreline Vya on a lagg is not a tit-for-tat equivalent to gunpods on an F4.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok what you replied with is test data on 20mm guns.  I'm not sure what you're trying to say.  And honestly, with a "here suck on some data" response, I'm not bothering to figure it out. 

 

And... The F4 gunpods were mainly fitted to wings assigned to boom and zoom bomber killing and pilots assigned to fighter/dogfight duty hated  them due to very noticeable performance drop. If they are still being used to good effect in fighter vs. fighter action, then good on the F4+gunpods pilot who is up to the challenge. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Mobile_BBQ said:

Ok what you replied with is test data on 20mm guns.  I'm not sure what you're trying to say.  And honestly, with a "here suck on some data" response, I'm not bothering to figure it out. 

 

in response to 

Quote

 and every time I've shot a 109 or 190 with the LaGG's guns it kept flying with negligible damage

 

I can also add this thread to your anecdote

 

 

Its worth figuring it out as it will give you an idea on the current performance of the in-game weapons. Just so that you don't have the impression that red guns do nothing like you claimed. Also getting 1-2 second burst on any plane is a stroke of luck rather than a commonplace happening.

 

 

Quote

And... The F4 gunpods were mainly fitted to wings assigned to boom and zoom bomber killing and pilots assigned to fighter/dogfight duty hated  them due to very noticeable performance drop. If they are still being used to good effect in fighter vs. fighter action, then good on the F4+gunpods pilot who is up to the challenge. 


We were discussing Vya equivalence to F4 gunpods...

 

 

Edited by xJammer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps consider making both the tank-killing Vya-23 for LaGG-3 and 109 F's Peshka-shredding but draggy wing gunpods unavailable for the first 2 maps that those fighter types appear. I dont know if anyone actually ever uses 109's gun pods but if it makes people happy? 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the U.S. time zone when Reds are outnumbered Blue straps those pods on like it's a pegging convention.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LeLv76_Erkki said:

Perhaps consider making both the tank-killing Vya-23 for LaGG-3 and 109 F's Peshka-shredding but draggy wing gunpods unavailable for the first 2 maps that those fighter types appear. I dont know if anyone actually ever uses 109's gun pods but if it makes people happy? 😉

 

I'd rather not have the 23mm and the gunpods altogether

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then why not as well forbid the 37mm on the lagg? It makes a superbly short work of the blue bombers....

 

And the cannons on i16... The list goes on :)

Edited by xJammer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many LaGG-3s are being used with the 23mm and 37mm to what effect?

Show me those AT LaGG-3 being used in sortie logs that get more than 2 tanks. Its way more efficient to use a bomber and carpet bomb 

 

How about we get Yak-9 in Oct '42 with its AT variants, LaGG-3 + Mig on map #2, Canon-Stuka gets pushed back to March '43 and no Canons on the Mc.202.

Also sprinkle some more capable medium bombers for the VVS like the Yer-2 and IL-4 into map #1 since they are in production by the time Barbarossa started and they carry significantly bigger bombloads (5 and 2.7 tons). 

 

Its still amazing how much whine there still is on 23mm canons when the convoys are pretty much aksing to be carpet bombed and nicely packed into 2 convoys that are way easier to cover

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue is that every time a side gets beaten you get this very whine-fest from the side that lost. "We didn't have vya 23mm!!" "Our bombers don't carry 1t bombs!" "All red aircraft are trashbuckets that are no match to blue fighters!"

 

At the end of the day, the game wasn't decided by vya cannon or early 109-f4. It was decided by the blues realising that depots can be cleaned up by first taking out the AAA cover, followed up by JABO that could level 100% of the buildings at the depot. I flew these missions myself with a bunch of pubbies on TAW, easily getting 15-20 buildings in a sortie. Ciddy did the same in a peshka on Kuban, saw him take out 17 buildings in a single sortie. 

 

I advocate historical basis for the campaign. Because if we decide to focus purely on balance you'll get a poop throwing match in both directions, similar to what is starting now with the ridiculous suggestions. Balance the game not by giving some hardly existing tech to the side that needs a buff, but instead by changing the symmetry of the win condition. Maybe 3 depots for one of the sides instead of 2? Maybe something else... 

 

 

Edit: Ideally I'd like to see the exotic configs become only available to pilots with sufficient rank in the game. Don't allow fresh pilots to take the 20mm on i16, or vya on the lagg, or the gunpods on the 109. Make the rank requirement be based on how rare the modification was - 1t bombs for he111 only given to the most experienced bomber drivers out there... As currently there is little incentive to stay alive in the game, 5 minute penalty for death hardly counts. 

Edited by xJammer
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...